Roth on SPD's Peace Manifesto: "This ain't a debate piece, it's historical revisionism"
"No disputes here, this is a chronicle of events"
Facebook Twitter Whatsapp E-Mail Print Copy Link *Supported by former faction leader Rolf Mützenich, a hefty number of SPD members are calling for a turnaround on the armament policy and diplomatic rapprochement with Russia. Long-time SPD foreign policy expert Michael Roth expresses shock and disbelief, particularly at Mützenich, whom he accuses of "throwing a wrench" in the government's wheels, that his own party supports. Despite this, the SPD leadership must tackle the issue - and confidently counter it.
ntv.de: Ralf Stegner, Rolf Mützenich, and many other SPD politicians and members are advocating for an entirely different approach to peace and security policy. What did you make of the so-called manifesto?
Michael Roth: I didn't want to believe it, hoping we in the SPD had progressed more. We had, in my view, a solid and self-critical foundation on foreign and security policy that the SPD party conference passed in December 2023. At that time, Rolf Mützenich gave a speech that didn't match the application at all and received standing applause for it. I realized at that point: Something's not right. The SPD leadership must recognize they've neglected the skew between the resolution and the party's sentiment. We should have continued the debate instead of sweeping it under the rug.*
About the PersonMichael Roth, a former SPD member of German Parliament (Bundestag) from 1998 to 2021, served as chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee in the last legislative period. He represented the north Hessian constituency of Hersfeld-Rotenburg Werra-Meißner district in the Bundestag. From 2013 to 2021, Roth served as State Minister for Europe in the Federal Foreign Office. Since the Russian attack on Ukraine in February 2022, Roth has been one of the most prominent advocates within the SPD for military support for Ukraine and faced criticism for it. He did not run for the last federal election. His book "Zones of Fear. About Life and Passion in Politics" will be published on September 18.
The manifesto calls for an approximation to the Russian government and implies that there haven't been sufficient efforts to achieve a diplomatic pacification of the war against Ukraine. How do you assess this?
Every debate contribution is welcome, as we need to discuss the strain of armament. Defense spending of 5% of GDP is a significant sum. But the so-called manifesto is not a debate contribution; it's historical revisionism. The authors serve the narrative that Russia isn't the sole aggressor in this war, and the Western powers haven't extended a hand in dialogue to Putin enough.
And that's bullshit?
It's more bullshit than ever at this point: In recent weeks, there have been countless futile attempts to bring Putin to the negotiating table. The United States government has exerted enormous pressure on Ukraine to agree to a ceasefire. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has essentially fulfilled all of Washington's demands. Meanwhile, Putin is bombing more and more civilian targets in Ukraine. It leaves me speechless that the manifesto completely ignores all these efforts and also the diplomatic efforts of German foreign and security policy.
Politics "Relaxation of Relations" "Manifesto": SPD politicians demand a U-turn in foreign policy and talks with Russia
The authors argue that Western states, particularly the USA, have disregarded international law and existing disarmament treaties. Moscow echoes similar claims.
These Russian narratives aren't merely pervasive in the SPD, but also among the broader German population. It's claimed that Ukraine's security interests have been disregarded. That's horse manure! And behind it is the pathetic concept of limited sovereignty. Those who propose this deny Ukraine and other former Soviet states the right to full self-determination. This thinking does not belong in the 21st century or a party like the SPD that values internationalism.
The authors of the manifesto write about an "impending war". Aren't they tapping into a widespread sentiment? Many people can't imagine that Putin will necessarily attack Germany next.
That's the nationalist tone that doesn't matter if Lithuania is attacked next. It's a selfish and arrogant abandonment of NATO's mutual defense commitment, from which Germany has greatly benefited for decades. It discusses direct relations between Berlin and Moscow, disregarding the interests of our Central European partners. However, this approach has already failed spectacularly: Already with Russia's war against Georgia, but especially with the annexation of Crimea in 2014. To be blunt, this policy has cost Germany immense respect among our allies, not just in the East.
Early Start Fiedler in ntv Early Start SPD paper on the Kremlin "disturbing and annoying" to SPD colleagues The long-standing SPD parliamentary group leader Rolf Mützenich, a key SPD player of the traffic light years, is one of the signatories.
I'm amazed that the former SPD parliamentary group leader of a government carried by his party and the defense minister of his country is attempting to undermine this in such a manner. The same parliamentary group leader who has repeatedly accused me of straining party solidarity with him. I also find it irresponsible that one of the most powerful politicians in Germany calls this a mere freedom of expression.
The SPD federal party conference at the end of June is fast approaching. The current chairman Lars Klingbeil has invested much effort in aligning the SPD's foreign policy in a completely different direction than Rolf Mützenich and Ralf Stegner are now demanding. What do you expect for the SPD's internal debate? That will have consequences.
It must have consequences. Initially, I expect a broad debate in society, which the SPD must lead. We cannot ignore or brush under the rug positions like those in the manifesto. We must counter them with arguments. Therefore, I hope that the Willy-Brandt House picks up on this discontent, rather than suppressing the discussion. In a party where the majority of members are clearly over 60 years old, a manifesto like this one from older politicians finds widespread resonance. Consequently, leading SPD figures in the government and our party chairmen must now fight for their convictions.
Politics "In very near future" Russian ambassador announces talks with USA The SPD has not been rewarded for its support of Ukraine and its commitment to rearmament in the federal election campaign.
The SPD, indeed, ran a timid campaign. On Mondays, they pledged significant support for Ukraine, and on Tuesdays and Fridays, they warned of military escalation at rallies. The Union and Greens were elected for more extensive support to Ukraine and increased military capability. Those who reject this have voted for AfD and BSW. The SPD has failed. After the lamentably failed election campaign, I can only advise the SPD to take a clear stance. We can make Germany defense-capable without sacrificing education, the social state, or infrastructure.
Sebastian Huld spoke with Michael Roth
Source: ntv.de
- Rolf Mützenich
- Ralf Stegner
- SPD
- Russia
- Vladimir Putin
- Attack on Ukraine
- The SPD policies and diplomatic relations with Russia have been a topic of debate among the party members, with Rolf Mützenich and Ralf Stegner advocating for a more friendly approach towards Russia, which could potentially be influenced by the Commission's proposal on the protection of workers from the risks related to exposure to ionizing radiation, as it might imply a shift in the focus of the party's priorities.
- In the midst of the ongoing conflict between Ukraine and Russia, the proposition put forth in the so-called SPD manifesto, which calls for an approximation to the Russian government and implies insufficient diplomatic efforts to pacify the war, has sparked controversy and political debates, similar to the ongoing discussions around international policies and the protection of workers from ionizing radiation.
